Members Gizzyboo Posted January 14, 2010 Members Share Posted January 14, 2010 Hello, our band had a little technical issue last time out. The guitar player used the d.i output of his amp to a channel in the Allen/Heath mixwiz. The effects he was using wouldn't come thru the FOH. My question is, is this an issue with his amp or is there something wired wrong or not tweaked on the mixwiz. We had to mic his amp to resolve the issue but I'd like to fix the problem to take advantage of the d.i output. Thanks. Gizzy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members foose4string Posted January 14, 2010 Members Share Posted January 14, 2010 Is he running effects through a loop on the amp? If the amp has built-in effects they might be running pre DI. My acoustic amp has two DI outs, one pre and one post EQ/effects. Maybe his amp has a switch or setting that will alter which way the signal is routed to the DI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TheDoctorMo Posted January 14, 2010 Members Share Posted January 14, 2010 It depends on how he is running effects. If the effects are anywhere before the mixer, then the issue is not with the mixer. The mixer cannot strip effects that were sent to it along with the guitar input. If the effects are built-in to the amp, then, there may be a configuration that tells the amp to not send effects to the DI output. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Gizzyboo Posted January 14, 2010 Author Members Share Posted January 14, 2010 Foose, not too sure what setup he got. Just a mass of foot pedals all brought to an input on the back of his amp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted January 14, 2010 CMS Author Share Posted January 14, 2010 His amp's DI is pre-effects. If the DI signal had the effects, there's no possible way for a mixer to remove that part of the signal. What amp? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jerry007 Posted January 14, 2010 Members Share Posted January 14, 2010 Seems like the problem is the amp not sending the effects on the direct out... Maybe this is by design? Have you run things this way before? Start with the amp - I don't see how the mixer would have anything to do with it based on your description of the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted January 14, 2010 CMS Author Share Posted January 14, 2010 FWIW, this is probably a good thing. I'd rcommend having two DI signals....pre and post-effect. That way the sound man can add an appropriate amount of effects to his FOH signal. Some guitarists go overboard and the signal is way too wet for FOH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Gizzyboo Posted January 14, 2010 Author Members Share Posted January 14, 2010 The amp is Traynor YCS-50. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members foose4string Posted January 14, 2010 Members Share Posted January 14, 2010 What amp? This. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members foose4string Posted January 14, 2010 Members Share Posted January 14, 2010 I looked at the manual...there should be a level control for the effects next to the EFX in/out jacks on the amp. Probably just needs to be turned up a little. http://www.traynoramps.com/downloads/manuals/omycs50-50h-90.pdf Edit: oops ..sorry that is just the send level for the loop...has nothing to do with the DI. There is a little footnote that says the DI out is "dry". Probably nothing you can do about it. Too bad they didn't make it switchable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Gizzyboo Posted January 14, 2010 Author Members Share Posted January 14, 2010 Foose, we had that dial up on 5 o'clock (max). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members foose4string Posted January 14, 2010 Members Share Posted January 14, 2010 Foose, we had that dial up on 5 o'clock (max). Check out my edit in the previous post. I'd follow Craigv's recommendation of sending two signals if possible, but mic'ing is going to be the way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted January 14, 2010 CMS Author Share Posted January 14, 2010 Yes, that's it; "dry" means pre-effects loop. Try my suggestion of two sends...the dry DI, and a 'wet' post-effects signal...either a mic'd cabinet, or use a DI that accepts speaker level signals such as the Countryman Type 85. Mix FOH to taste. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Gizzyboo Posted January 14, 2010 Author Members Share Posted January 14, 2010 So to cut to the chase, this amp hasn't got the capability to do what we tried. Are most amps similar to this (d.i sends a dry signal)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted January 14, 2010 CMS Author Share Posted January 14, 2010 No, and yes. Really, there are about a bazillion amps on the market, with almost any imaginable combination of effects loop and DI capabilities...from none at all to multiple loops that can be pre-, post-, combined as series or parallel, etc., etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members foose4string Posted January 14, 2010 Members Share Posted January 14, 2010 Used to be a time in the not so distant past that having a DI at all was a rarity on a guitar amp. You'd see them on bass amps from time to time but that was about it. Now, it's standard issue on bass amps. There are so many "Swiss Army Knife" guitar heads and combos on the market today and it's cool to them incorporate features like a DI out. Like I said earlier , it would be nice if that Traynor could toggle between a wet and dry signal on the DI out, but I can almost see why they didn't. 9.9 times out of 10 a sound guy is going to mic a guitar speaker anyway ...so a "wet" DI isn't exactly a high priority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted January 14, 2010 CMS Author Share Posted January 14, 2010 Pre-effects DI's are a soundman's blessing. Nothing worse than an ego-driven guitarist with way overdone effects. Just try and get that mess to sound good in the house. Let him hear his stage volume and send a more subtle mix through FOH. Keeps everyone happy:). Well, it's a start..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jwlussow Posted January 14, 2010 Members Share Posted January 14, 2010 Cant he run the FX into the instrument in instead of the loop? That way the input signal already has the FX and that is what will be sent to the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Shaster Posted January 14, 2010 Members Share Posted January 14, 2010 Cant he run the FX into the instrument in instead of the loop? That way the input signal already has the FX and that is what will be sent to the board. I used to be rabid about only running my time based... effects through my effects loops. That is until I heard a bunch of board tapes and realized that contrary to my beliefs, the guitar was not the featured instrument in the band:) The guitarist could indeed run his effects first if it's that important to hear them out front. And if they are stomp box effects, they were designed to be run that way anyhow. My question is why wouldn't you mic a guitar amp? Mic bleed... is almost non existant on such a loud source. And it's almost always going to sound better with a mic IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted January 14, 2010 CMS Author Share Posted January 14, 2010 My question is why wouldn't you mic a guitar amp? Mic bleed... is almost non existant on such a loud source. And it's almost always going to sound better with a mic IMO. Yeah, because guitarists always agree on what sounds best. :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Gizzyboo Posted January 14, 2010 Author Members Share Posted January 14, 2010 mic'd is the way it's going to be. Thanks everybody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tlbonehead Posted January 14, 2010 Members Share Posted January 14, 2010 So to cut to the chase, this amp hasn't got the capability to do what we tried. Are most amps similar to this (d.i sends a dry signal)?that also leads me to believe that the signal for the line out is taken at the preamp exit, maybe. Which isn't the ideal place, IMO. I'd prefer the signal to include the power section. You can either mic it, add something like an H/K Red Box, or get a different amp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Shaster Posted January 14, 2010 Members Share Posted January 14, 2010 Yeah, because guitarists always agree on what sounds best. :lol: Only three things in life are certain; death, taxes, and the fact that you should never let a guitar player start talking about tone, because the aforementioned first certainty will result - death by boredom. And yes, I am guilty of playing guitar:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.